FEMA inspector arrested before storm

An inspector for the federal government was facing grand theft charges last fall when he verified a Homestead man's claim for disaster relief, according to testimony and court records.

Jose Perez, 62, conducted an inspection Oct. 10 that prompted the federal government to pay Daniel Bellegarde more than $11,000 to replace furniture purportedly damaged by water and sewage during Hurricane Frances. Federal prosecutors say the claim was bogus.

Bellegarde, 53, is currently on trial in federal court in Miami for mail fraud and related offenses.

Called by the government on the third day of Bellegarde's trial, Perez testified he had no memory of the inspection of Bellegarde's damage claim to the Federal Emergency Management Agency. Under questioning by Assistant U.S. Attorney Susan Osborne, he also acknowledged that he had gotten in trouble with the law "six or seven months ago," explaining that it involved a bad check he received from a real estate client he met in a bar.

Perez, who has a real estate license, was charged in August with grand theft in Miami-Dade County. The inspector, who had no prior criminal record, qualified for a pretrial diversionary program in Miami-Dade County, said his lawyer, Scott Kotler.

The felony charges were filed just weeks before he began conducting inspections as a subcontractor for FEMA, court records show. Perez testified that he performed about 300 inspections in Miami-Dade, Broward and Orange counties last year.

Kotler said he had to get a judge's permission so that Perez could travel north on FEMA business without violating conditions of his bail.

In April, the South Florida Sun-Sentinel reported that FEMA was entrusting people with criminal records to enter disaster victims' homes to verify damage claims. FEMA refuses to disclose the identity of its inspectors and their supervisors but the newspaper's investigation found at least 30 inspectors or managers with criminal records from across the country.

Federal officials have pointed to the inspectors as their primary defense against accusations of widespread fraud in connection with a $31 million payout in Miami-Dade, which was barely brushed by Frances over the Labor Day weekend.

A FEMA spokesman did not immediately return a call and e-mail Friday seeking comment regarding Perez.

Kotler, his attorney, said: "For what it's worth, yes, if the mere fact that you've been arrested should disqualify you from being an inspector, well, yes he was arrested. But someone should look at the incident here before they slay this poor guy or slay FEMA."

Perez explained in court that he accepted a check worth about $40,000 in 2002 from a foreign investor he met in a bar. The man was interested in Miami real estate, and the check was to cover Perez's expenses and a deposit on any property he might purchase.

Perez testified that he had spent about $13,000 before he learned from the bank that the check was no good. The bank had previously honored the check, he said.

An arrest affidavit for Perez states that he and a companion deposited a $60,000 check into a bank account May 13, 2002 and withdrew $13,049 later that month even though the account had been closed in late April 2002.

"The bank made several attempts to have the defendant and co-defendant reimburse the money and have been unsuccessful," the affidavit states.

Kotler said Perez is not a criminal.

"This guy, at least based on what I saw here, had no ill intentions," he said. "If ever I had a client that really didn't deserve to be arrested this guy was probably it. He's not a guy that went ahead and took a stolen check that he knew was bogus and tried to pass it off. It appeared to him to be a legitimate business deal."

The charges will be dismissed if Perez stays out of trouble and pays back all of the money he owes to the bank, Kotler said.

Meanwhile, the trial has revealed other institutional problems at FEMA. On Thursday, a FEMA supervisor testified that the agency cut Bellegarde a check two days before it mailed him a form to sign confirming the inspector's findings.